Prendergast v. Clements

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that petitioner’s ha-beas challenges to original conviction were untimely despite intervening resentencing upon probation violation
• holding that courts must assess the timeliness of claims on a “claim by claim basis” and affirming the district court’s dismissal of Prendergast’s claims challenging his conviction as untimely even though his claims challenging an amended sentence were not
• holding petitioner’s habeas challenge tot original conviction was untimely despite intervening resenting on probation violation
• observing that the statute of limitations must be applied “on a claim-by-claim basis”
• observing that the statute of limitations must be applied “on a claim-by-claim basis”
• explaining that “§ 2244(d)(1) should be applied on a claim-by- claim basis”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).